Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Bryce Slinging Dots Downfield


mrBdawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, tukafan21 said:

Multiple people have said in this thread how those weren't dots, but sure, it's just me who can't see it.

Nobody is bashing the throw like you seem to think we're doing, we're just pointing out that you're trying to call it something that it just wasn't.

They were perfect throws on 4th down resulting in a win against the best team in the NFL. My god you hater’s are unbearable…

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Manna said:

I’d say in all our wins this year, except ATL, he had to show up in certain times. Hes shown he possesses a clutch gene, but he’s wildly inconsistent. I don’t know what it is and how to coach him on being more consistent, but we have a good team that can win with him. I’m all for replacing him with better talent, but I don’t want to replace him just to replace him. 

There's no question he has a clutch gene to him, but he also as an equally as large, if not larger, "fug up gene" and in the end, that's going to cost us more games than the other wins us.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, weyco2000 said:

They were perfect throws on 4th down resulting in a win against the best team in the NFL. My god you hater’s are unbearable…

Nobody is bashing the throws, but trying to say the throws were something other than what they were and using it as the proof that he should be our long term solution is what many of us view as unbearable.

Even if those were the two greatest throws in the history of the NFL, 2 throws a game, or even worse, 2 throws every few weeks, is not a sustainable way to build a long term successful team.

We're not bashing Bryce to bash Bryce, we point out legitimate concerns we objectively see with our own eyes and project how they might affect our/his future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

There's no question he has a clutch gene to him, but he also as an equally as large, if not larger, "fug up gene" and in the end, that's going to cost us more games than the other wins us.

With the right coaching hopefully we can turn off that bad gene lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, McLovin said:

And it was the wrong read and late.

Yes and no, and that's what I go back to what I was saying in the game thread today about him "locking in on T-Mac at times"

I don't think it was a wrong or late read, because I don't think it was a read play, I think the play was called to throw that pass to T-Mac and there was no other option.  

It's like they tell Bryce one of two things on 90% of pass plays.

1.  This is a non T-Mac play, don't even look his way, he's just out there for the defense to give him attention.

2.  This is a T-Mac pass play, you're throwing to him and nobody else so don't bother going through your progressions.

It's why I don't think Bryce has an issue of locking onto him when he shouldn't be, I think it's 100% Canales telling him when he is or isn't throwing to T-Mac and now allowing Bryce to make opposing decisions on those plays based on what he sees.

Edited by tukafan21
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Manna said:

Didn’t watch the game but I saw that Brees called the game as well. He knows a thing or two about passing because he’s something of a quarterback himself. 

This just made me think, hmm I wonder how much Brees liked being the comp for Young. Could he feel insulted? Say, wait a freaking minute here that guy is me in high school…

Edited by strato
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Yes and no, and that's what I go back to what I was saying in the game thread today about him "locking in on T-Mac at times"

I don't think it was a wrong or late read, because I don't think it was a read play, I think the play was called to throw that pass to T-Mac and there was no other option.  

It's like they tell Bryce one of two things on 90% of pass plays.

1.  This is a non T-Mac play, don't even look his way, he's just out there for the defense to give him attention.

2.  This is a T-Mac pass play, you're throwing to him and nobody else so don't bother going through your progressions.

It's why I don't think Bryce has an issue of locking onto him when he shouldn't be, I think it's 100% Canales telling him when he is or isn't throwing to T-Mac and now allowing Bryce to make opposing decisions on those plays based on what he sees.

He had the seam wide ass open right away, never came off T-Mac, then threw it late. Even if it's designed for T-Mac, it's just his primary on the play and he absolutely should have come off of it.

I'm also not buying that's what they're telling him. He just can't read anything.

Edited by McLovin
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, weyco2000 said:

They were perfect throws on 4th down resulting in a win against the best team in the NFL. My god you hater’s are unbearable…

We didn’t start the thread. People were very happy we won. Then we basically get called out, wtf you want? 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont understand you guys, we have a QB that has proven himself to be a bottom third of the league guy and you guys are against upgrading him why??

We have an offense that is ready to be one of the best in the league being held back by mediocre QB play.

We ran the ball 40 times today, Bryce tossed it 20.

Did he play a good game? Yes. Could we have a better QB on a weekly basis? fug yes.

Edited by PootieNunu
  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...